Did Kerry flip flop on "Double taxation of dividends"? [View All]

[Touchdown]

Some Repug on the American forum posted this from the Moonie Times, and goes on to say he "has a credibility problem"...linking from an obvious "credible source".:eyes:

<snip>-"Last December, when he was widely considered the frontrunner for the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination, Mr. Kerry delivered a bold speech in Cleveland calling for "ending the double taxation of dividends." Five weeks later, President Bush echoed Mr. Kerry's call to eliminate the personal income tax applied to stock dividends. Mr. Kerry promptly flip-flopped. Having long ago rejected the low tax rates he embraced early in his career, Mr. Kerry quickly reversed his provocative position on dividends and made a strategic decision to continue playing the class-warfare card among the Democratic electorate. He's been doing so ever since.
Following the tax relief enacted under Mr. Bush, the top dividend tax rate is now 15 percent (i.e., 15 percentage points higher than what Mr. Kerry endorsed in December); and the top personal-income-tax rate is now 35 percent, 7 percentage points higher than the top rate Mr. Kerry supported in 1986. Yet, Mr. Kerry now demands that both rates be raised to nearly 40 percent, calling their reduction "special tax breaks." He claims that his economic policy would unleash the entrepreneurship of small businesses, which he rightly calls "America's economic engine." But he doesn't explain how raising the effective taxation of small-business S Corporations to nearly 40 percent would achieve this goal.
Once a stalwart free-trader who voted for NAFTA, Mr. Kerry has sacrificed that principle as well. He now uses widely understood code words. These include his promise to "appoint a U.S. Trade Representative who is an American patriot"; his pledge to enforce "strong labor and environmental standards" against America's developing-nation trading partners; and his get-tough declaration that a President Kerry would "order an immediate 120-day top-to-bottom review of all trade agreements." His trade flip-flop is a desperate attempt to appease the protectionists who dominate Democratic primaries.
"-<snip>

If anybody has the stomach for the link....

http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20031028-083518-5672r.htm

I was had...He posted that this was the Wash Post, and :wow: